Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 22 Apr 2026, 13:18 |
It is currently 22 Apr 2026, 13:18 |
|
|
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
01:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
12:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
08:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
10:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
11:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
08:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
65% (03:12) correct
35%
(03:14) wrong
based on 657
sessions
History
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
68% (01:23) correct
32%
(01:33) wrong
based on 822
sessions
History
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
56% (01:59) correct
44%
(02:04) wrong
based on 778
sessions
History
Answers and Explanations
1)
Take a moment to review the paradox and its implications before attacking the choices. The paradox essentially states that free speech should be limited at its extremes when the extremes could contribute to eliminating free speech. Looking for an answer choice that weakens the implications of the paradox turns up (D): The paradox states that extreme speech weakens stable government, a point weakened by a scenario in which extreme speech and stable government coexist.2)
Review the classical model in ¶3, paying particular attention to its scope. The classical model argues that political speech should be protected, whether it‘s extremist or not. While three of the answer choices deal with non-political speech, only (C) deals with political speech that the classical model would propose to protect.3)
Review the fortress model before eliminating answer choices that match with what a proponent would believe. The fortress model argues that extremist speech should be protected because more harm is done in banning it than in allowing the speech itself. While three choices reasonably follow from this, (A) contradicts the main point of the model in general: free speech shouldn’t be banned.Topic and Scope
- The author discusses two justifications for free speech in America:Mapping the Passage
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.